Bug#873878: [gluster-packaging] Fwd: Bug#873878: glusterfs-client: mount.glusterfs needs bash as /bin/sh

2017-09-04 Thread Niels de Vos
On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 03:54:05PM +0200, Michael Lundkvist wrote: > On 09/01/2017 01:25 PM, Patrick Matthäi wrote: > > > > Am 01.09.2017 um 11:40 schrieb Niels de Vos: > > > On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 09:36:16AM +0200, Patrick Matthäi wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > how should it be fixed for

Bug#873878: [gluster-packaging] Fwd: Bug#873878: glusterfs-client: mount.glusterfs needs bash as /bin/sh

2017-09-02 Thread anoopcs
On 2017-09-01 16:55, Patrick Matthäi wrote: Am 01.09.2017 um 11:40 schrieb Niels de Vos: On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 09:36:16AM +0200, Patrick Matthäi wrote: Hi, how should it be fixed for glusterfs now? Better shell code without bashishm or do you want /bin/bash as shebang? Do you have a

Bug#873878: [gluster-packaging] Fwd: Bug#873878: glusterfs-client: mount.glusterfs needs bash as /bin/sh

2017-09-01 Thread Michael Lundkvist
On 09/01/2017 01:25 PM, Patrick Matthäi wrote: Am 01.09.2017 um 11:40 schrieb Niels de Vos: On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 09:36:16AM +0200, Patrick Matthäi wrote: Hi, how should it be fixed for glusterfs now? Better shell code without bashishm or do you want /bin/bash as shebang? Do you have a

Bug#873878: [gluster-packaging] Fwd: Bug#873878: glusterfs-client: mount.glusterfs needs bash as /bin/sh

2017-09-01 Thread Patrick Matthäi
Am 01.09.2017 um 11:40 schrieb Niels de Vos: > On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 09:36:16AM +0200, Patrick Matthäi wrote: >> Hi, >> >> how should it be fixed for glusterfs now? Better shell code without >> bashishm or do you want /bin/bash as shebang? > Do you have a preference? I do not know how much work